Literature DB >> 24957223

Changes in breast cancer risk distribution among Vermont women using screening mammography.

Kenyon C Bolton1, John L Mace1, Pamela M Vacek1, Sally D Herschorn1, Ted A James1, Jeffrey A Tice1, Karla Kerlikowske1, Berta M Geller1, Donald L Weaver1, Brian L Sprague2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening mammography utilization in Vermont has declined since 2009 during a time of changing screening guidelines and increased interest in personalized screening regimens. This study evaluates whether the breast cancer risk distribution of the state's screened population changed during the observed decline.
METHODS: We examined the breast cancer risk distribution among screened women between 2001 and 2012 using data from the Vermont Breast Cancer Surveillance System. We estimated each screened woman's 5-year risk of breast cancer using the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk calculator. Annual screening counts by risk group were normalized and age-adjusted to the Vermont female population by direct standardization.
RESULTS: The normalized rate of low-risk (5-year breast cancer risk of <1%) women screened increased 8.3% per year (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.8 to 11.9) between 2003 and 2008 and then declined by -5.4% per year (95% CI = -8.1 to -2.6) until 2012. When stratified by age group, the rate of low-risk women screened declined -4.4% per year (95% CI = -8.8 to 0.1; not statistically significant) for ages 40 to 49 years and declined a statistically significant -7.1% per year (95% CI = -12.1 to -2.0) for ages 50 to 74 years during 2008 to 2012. These declines represented the bulk of overall decreases in screening after 2008, with rates for women categorized in higher risk levels generally exhibiting small annual changes.
CONCLUSIONS: The observed decline in women screened in Vermont in recent years is largely attributable to reductions in screening visits by women who are at low risk of developing breast cancer.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24957223      PMCID: PMC4375382          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju157

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  49 in total

Review 1.  Assessing the risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  K Armstrong; A Eisen; B Weber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-02-24       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  The relation between projected breast cancer risk, perceived cancer risk, and mammography use. Results from the National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  C P Gross; G Filardo; H S Singh; A N Freedman; M H Farrell
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-12-22       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Evidence-based breast cancer prevention: the importance of individual risk.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  The public's response to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's 2009 recommendations on mammography screening.

Authors:  Linda B Squiers; Debra J Holden; Suzanne E Dolina; Annice E Kim; Carla M Bann; Jeanette M Renaud
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 5.  Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models.

Authors:  Eitan Amir; Orit C Freedman; Bostjan Seruga; D Gareth Evans
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Family breast cancer history and mammography: Framingham Offspring Study.

Authors:  J M Murabito; J C Evans; M G Larson; B E Kreger; G L Splansky; K M Freund; M A Moskowitz; P W Wilson
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 7.  Perceived risk and adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines among women with a familial history of breast cancer: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Meghan J Walker; Anna M Chiarelli; Julia A Knight; Lucia Mirea; Gord Glendon; Paul Ritvo
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice.

Authors:  Karen J Wernli; Wendy B DeMartini; Laura Ichikawa; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise M Henderson; Berta M Geller; Mike Hofmann; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Screening mammography beliefs and recommendations: a web-based survey of primary care physicians.

Authors:  Shagufta Yasmeen; Patrick S Romano; Daniel J Tancredi; Naomi H Saito; Julie Rainwater; Richard L Kravitz
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Avoiding bias due to perfect prediction in multiple imputation of incomplete categorical variables.

Authors:  Ian R White; Rhian Daniel; Patrick Royston
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 1.681

View more
  2 in total

1.  The impact of mammographic screening on the surgical management of breast cancer.

Authors:  Ted A James; Jacqueline E Wade; Brian L Sprague
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 3.454

2.  The Effect of Personal Characteristics, Perceived Threat, Efficacy and Breast Cancer Anxiety on Breast Cancer Screening Activation.

Authors:  Patrick De Pelsmacker; Martine Lewi; Veroline Cauberghe
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2017-09-27
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.